Bummer on the compensation. Arizona did a nice job driving up the price on us, considering all the other cheap QB movement this year. But if the Hawks front office doesn't see any QBs in the draft worth taking, which I agree with for the most part, and think Whitehurst can be a starter so be it. I just think San Diego has to be tooting their horn after this move..

What a rip off. I'm sorry, but it is. We get a 7th for Wallace next year, a guy who while not great has actual game experience and is a decent game manager. Then we trade this much for a guy he hasn't even played a down? This team is buying high and selling low.

If he becomes a successful starting QB for the Seahawks, then the price is fine (could even be a great price), but that's a big IF. From the Charger's side, they got a great price for him....and we got a 7th round pick for trading our backup.

We traded a 4th rounder (equivalent to a 3rd next year) and dropped 20 spots in the second (a difference of 200 points per the value chart = to the 78th pick overall, which is a 3rd rounder). I think we overpaid considering this guy is completely unproven.

It's a big risk to put this kind of investment in a guy when he hasn't shown it on the field, but I think it's exciting to finally have the guy that our front office thinks will be our next franchise QB on the roster. It'll be fun to see what happens with this.

I agree Matt is done with this franchise. This move doesn't make any sense unless Whitehurst is coming to be the starter. Guys like Lefevour and Tebow could have been had for less as developmental QBs.

The good news is that we still have the same number of picks this year. The bad news is that's a pretty steep price. Seems to suggest to me that they're seriously looking at Whitehurst as starter material. I'm starting to think that they'll be quietly shopping Hass around between now and the draft.

chihawk wrote:The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?

chihawk wrote:The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?

That's the thing. We've given up high draft picks for only 2 years of a guy who won't even start the first year.

Mckinja wrote:We traded a 4th rounder (equivalent to a 3rd next year) and dropped 20 spots in the second (a difference of 200 points per the value chart = to the 78th pick overall, which is a 3rd rounder). I think we overpaid considering this guy is completely unproven.

According to Sando's article we gave up approx 270 points, which he puts as a end of the Second round pick. So low 2nd to mid-3rd is the range. Looking worse case, the team gave up to 2nd round value for Charlie's rights. At this point either is steep considering, so it doesn't bode well for the FO so far. I dread what the Marshall deal will end up looking like.

With a 2 year deal they don't think he is the future. They are taking a flyer out on him, but they aren't committing to him. They paid to much to get him. Starting to wonder if these guys know what they are doing. At this rate we will probably get trade our 6th and a pick next year for Marshall.

chihawk wrote:The thing that is particularly strange with this is the report that we are signing him to a 2-year deal. If they think he is the future QB for the team, why would this only be a 2-year deal?

That's the thing. We've given up high draft picks for only 2 years of a guy who won't even start the first year.

Maybe it's a two-year extension to the tender he signed...making it at least a three-year deal. If not and Matt ends up starting this year, they plan on handing it over to Charlie when he has one year left....This makes no sense whatsoever.